Wednesday, October 12, 2011
GPS inventor joins court fight
against warrantless tracking
Electronic Frontier Foundation
The principal inventor of the Global Positioning System (GPS) and other leading technologists have joined the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) in urging the U.S Supreme Court to block the government from using GPS tracking without first getting a warrant, arguing that the massive collection of sensitive location data should require court oversight.
Roger L. Easton is considered the father of GPS as the principal inventor and developer of the Timation Satellite Navigation System at the Naval Research Laboratory. The current GPS is based on Timation, and its principles of operation are fundamentally identical. In an amicus brief filed with the Supreme Court Monday in United States v. Jones, EFF, Mr. Easton, along with other technology experts, pointed out the many ways in which GPS tracking is fundamentally different from and more invasive than other surveillance technologies the court has allowed before, and how law enforcement use of GPS without a warrant violates Americans' reasonable expectations of privacy.
"This is the first case where the Supreme Court will consider automatic, persistent, passive location tracking by law enforcement," said EFF Senior Staff Attorney Marcia Hofmann. "The government can use location information over time to learn where you go to church, what sort of doctors you go to, what meetings and activities you participate in, and much more. Police should not have blanket permission to install GPS devices and collect detailed information about people's movements over time without court review."
In Jones, FBI agents planted a GPS device on a car while it was on private property. Agents then used the GPS to track the position of the vehicle every ten seconds for a full month without obtaining a search warrant. An appeals court ruled that the surveillance was unconstitutional without a warrant, but the government appealed the decision.
"If police are allowed to plant GPS devices wherever they please, that's essentially blanket permission for widespread, ongoing police surveillance without any court supervision," said EFF Legal Director Cindy Cohn. "It's not hard to see how that kind of leeway would be abused. We hope the Supreme Court takes a close look at how this technology works and act to protect the Fourth Amendment rights of Americans."
The brief was authored by Andrew Pincus of Mayer Brown LLP and The Yale Law School Supreme Court Clinic. It was also signed by the Center for Democracy and Technology, Professor Matt Blaze of the University of Pennsylvania, Professor Andrew J. Blumberg of the University of Texas at Austin, and Professor Norman M. Sadeh of Carnegie Mellon University.
For more information:
http://eff.org
Iranian slay plot charge: truth or propaganda payback?
Commentary:
Certainly it is true that governments engage in murderous conspiracies. And elements of the Iranian regime may well be capable of attempting to hire drug cartel assassins to kill the Saudi Arabian ambassador to America.
On the other hand, a component of the U.S. "national security" clique has a strong reason to paint the Iranian government blacker than black: President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's public accusations against the United States government for arranging the attacks of Sept. 11.
Ahmadinejad, of course, has much blood on his own hands. Yet, he is the only national leader willing to point out the obvious. So if he makes such an accusation of conspiracy, what better way to discredit him even more than by accusing a component of his regime of a murderous conspiracy?
It is noteworthy that the Iranian agents were talking with U.S. undercover narcs. In the murky world of intelligence, agents often talk with their opposites in hopes of probing their true motives. We can't really be sure the Iranians were serious about a murder plot, though they may have been. We can be sure that the Americans, rather than playing the usual intelligence game, decided a big public bust was in their interests.
Newz from Limbo is a news site and, the hosting mechanism notwithstanding, should not be defined as a web log or as 'little more than a community forum'... Write News from Limbo at NewzfromLimbo=at=gmail=dot=com... The philosophical orientation of Newz from Limbo is best described as libertarian... For anti-censorship links: http://veilside78.blogspot.com/2010/12/anti-censorship-spectrum_23.html (If link fails, cut and paste it into the url bar)...
against warrantless tracking
Electronic Frontier Foundation
The principal inventor of the Global Positioning System (GPS) and other leading technologists have joined the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) in urging the U.S Supreme Court to block the government from using GPS tracking without first getting a warrant, arguing that the massive collection of sensitive location data should require court oversight.
Roger L. Easton is considered the father of GPS as the principal inventor and developer of the Timation Satellite Navigation System at the Naval Research Laboratory. The current GPS is based on Timation, and its principles of operation are fundamentally identical. In an amicus brief filed with the Supreme Court Monday in United States v. Jones, EFF, Mr. Easton, along with other technology experts, pointed out the many ways in which GPS tracking is fundamentally different from and more invasive than other surveillance technologies the court has allowed before, and how law enforcement use of GPS without a warrant violates Americans' reasonable expectations of privacy.
"This is the first case where the Supreme Court will consider automatic, persistent, passive location tracking by law enforcement," said EFF Senior Staff Attorney Marcia Hofmann. "The government can use location information over time to learn where you go to church, what sort of doctors you go to, what meetings and activities you participate in, and much more. Police should not have blanket permission to install GPS devices and collect detailed information about people's movements over time without court review."
In Jones, FBI agents planted a GPS device on a car while it was on private property. Agents then used the GPS to track the position of the vehicle every ten seconds for a full month without obtaining a search warrant. An appeals court ruled that the surveillance was unconstitutional without a warrant, but the government appealed the decision.
"If police are allowed to plant GPS devices wherever they please, that's essentially blanket permission for widespread, ongoing police surveillance without any court supervision," said EFF Legal Director Cindy Cohn. "It's not hard to see how that kind of leeway would be abused. We hope the Supreme Court takes a close look at how this technology works and act to protect the Fourth Amendment rights of Americans."
The brief was authored by Andrew Pincus of Mayer Brown LLP and The Yale Law School Supreme Court Clinic. It was also signed by the Center for Democracy and Technology, Professor Matt Blaze of the University of Pennsylvania, Professor Andrew J. Blumberg of the University of Texas at Austin, and Professor Norman M. Sadeh of Carnegie Mellon University.
For more information:
http://eff.org
Iranian slay plot charge: truth or propaganda payback?
Commentary:
Certainly it is true that governments engage in murderous conspiracies. And elements of the Iranian regime may well be capable of attempting to hire drug cartel assassins to kill the Saudi Arabian ambassador to America.
On the other hand, a component of the U.S. "national security" clique has a strong reason to paint the Iranian government blacker than black: President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's public accusations against the United States government for arranging the attacks of Sept. 11.
Ahmadinejad, of course, has much blood on his own hands. Yet, he is the only national leader willing to point out the obvious. So if he makes such an accusation of conspiracy, what better way to discredit him even more than by accusing a component of his regime of a murderous conspiracy?
It is noteworthy that the Iranian agents were talking with U.S. undercover narcs. In the murky world of intelligence, agents often talk with their opposites in hopes of probing their true motives. We can't really be sure the Iranians were serious about a murder plot, though they may have been. We can be sure that the Americans, rather than playing the usual intelligence game, decided a big public bust was in their interests.
Newz from Limbo is a news site and, the hosting mechanism notwithstanding, should not be defined as a web log or as 'little more than a community forum'... Write News from Limbo at NewzfromLimbo=at=gmail=dot=com... The philosophical orientation of Newz from Limbo is best described as libertarian... For anti-censorship links: http://veilside78.blogspot.com/2010/12/anti-censorship-spectrum_23.html (If link fails, cut and paste it into the url bar)...
Tuesday, October 11, 2011
Birch Society spotlights a call
for Occupy the Fed protests
The Occupy Wall Street protests have stirred the John Birch Society to give favorable coverage to a similar initiative dubbed Occupy the Fed."Perhaps surprising to some, many conservatives sympathize with the Occupy Wall Street protesters because they understand the motivating factors behind the protests: increased costs on everyday items, unemployment, inflation, etc.," according to a Birch Society article.
"However, those conservatives recognize that much of the anger of the protesters is directed at the wrong target," the society said. "The real enemy, they contend, is the Federal Reserve, and it is for that reason that those conservatives have chosen to use the momentum of the Occupy Wall Street protests to stage Occupy the Fed protests instead.
One organizer, known only as “Anonymous A99,” announced the first operation targeting the Fed, called “Operation Empire State Rebellion,” on March 12. The announcement explained that the movement was intended to be a “decentralized non-violent resistance movement.” Anonymous A99 said of the intent of the organizers:
Above all, we aim to break up the global banking cartel centered at the Federal Reserve, International Monetary Fund, Bank of International Settlement and World Bank.
We demand that the primary dealers within the Federal Reserve banking system be broken up and held accountable for rigging markets and destroying the global economy, effective immediately.
We demand that the primary dealers within the Federal Reserve banking system be broken up and held accountable for rigging markets and destroying the global economy, effective immediately.
As a first sign of good faith, we demand Ben Bernanke step down as Federal Reserve chairman.
Until our demands are met and a rule of law is restored, we will engage in a relentless campaign of non-violent, peaceful, civil disobedience.”
Boston protesters said to get rough handling
Anti-Wall Street protesters say they were roughly handled when Boston police moved in early this morning to arrest more than 100 people for civil disobedience, including a legal observer for the radical National Lawyers Guild.
Had the police simply approached those who were congregating in a "forbidden zone" and asked them to move off site, many might have done so. Had they approached them one by one and escorted them to police vans, there would have been less of a fracas.
But, according to some observers, the police "attacked."
If so, a likely contributing factor was lack of media presence, who had not been assigned to show up at 1 a.m. Police nearly always behave differently when under a media spotlight.
One question that needs answering is whether a backroom deal was made whereby financial elitists held back the press and encouraged the cops to move in during the dead of night (by the way, it seems unlikely that protester presence in "forbidden zones" at that time of night posed any threat of traffic tie-ups).
Friday, October 7, 2011
Top red assists ex-Obama aide
in 'rebuild America' movementAccuracy in Media, a conservative watchdog group, reports that Van Jones, the former White House aide and former Communist, remains on very good terms with the Communist Party.
Judith LeBlanc, who runs a group called Peace Action and is one of the vice-chairs of the Communist Party, was introduced on stage as one of Van Jones’s “partners” in the “rebuild the American dream” movement, AIM says.
More at http://aim.org
Monday, August 1, 2011
Google+ 'real name' policy
spells trouble for dissenters
spells trouble for dissenters
Commentary by Jillian York, Electronic Frontier Foundation
pseu·do·nym
[sood-n-im]
–noun a fictitious name used by an author to conceal his or her identity; pen name.
There are myriad reasons why individuals may wish to use a name other than the one they were born with. They may be concerned about threats to their lives or livelihoods, or they may risk political or economic retribution. They may wish to prevent discrimination or they may use a name that’s easier to pronounce or spell in a given culture.
Online, the reasons multiply. Internet culture has long encouraged the use of "handles" or "user names," pseudonyms that may or may not be tied to a person’s offline identity. Longtime online inhabitants may have handles that have spanned over twenty years.
Pseudonymous speech has played a critical role throughout history as well. From the literary efforts of George Eliot and Mark Twain to the explicitly political advocacy of Publius in the Federalist Papers or Junius' letters to the Public Advertiser in 18th century London, people have contributed strongly to public debate under pseudonyms and continue to do so to this day.
A new debate around pseudonymity on online platforms has arisen as a result of the identification policy of Google+, which requires users to identify by "the name your friends, family, or co-workers usually call you". This policy is similar to that of Facebook’s which requires users to "provide their real names and information." Google’s policy has in a few short weeks attracted significant attention both within the community and outside of it, sparking debate as to whether a social platform should place limits on identity. A considerable number of Google+ users have already experienced account deactivation as a result of the policy, which Kirrily "Skud" Robert, a former Google employee kicked off the service for identifying as "Skud," has closely documented.
Those in favor of the use of "real names" on social platforms have presented a number of arguments: that real names improve user behavior and create a more civil environment; that real names help prevent against stalking and harassment by making it easier to go after offenders; that a policy requiring real names prevents law enforcement agents from “sneaking in” to the service to spy on users; that real names make users accountable for their actions.
While these arguments are not entirely without merit, they misframe the problem. It is not incumbent upon strict real-name policy advocates to show that policies insisting on the use of real names have an upside. It is incumbent upon them to demonstrate that these benefits outweigh some very serious drawbacks.
Consider, for example, Wael Ghonim, the now-famous Egyptian whose Facebook page, We Are All Khaled Said, inspired thousands to join in the January uprising. Though the page was created in the summer of 2010, not long after the death of Khaled Said at the hands of policemen, it wasn’t until later that year that it began to truly gain momentum. And yet, its presence in the protests almost didn’t happen: In November 2010, the page went down after its administrator (now known to have been Ghonim) was reported for using a pseudonym. While Facebook was able to offer a solution, allowing an "identified" person to step in for Ghonim, this case was largely exceptional, owing to Ghonim’s ability to connect to Facebook staff and solve the problem. Not everyone has these types of connections, and there’s no way of knowing how many people have fallen through the cracks, so to speak, because they were unaware of how to appeal an account deactivation. In Ghonim’s case, using his real name would have placed him under considerable risk. And while pseudonymity provides no guarantees, it makes it considerably more difficult for authorities to identify activists.
There are myriad reasons why an individual may feel safer identifying under a name other than their birth name. Teenagers who identify as members of the LGBT community, for example, are regularly harassed online and may prefer to identify online using a pseudonym. Individuals whose spouses or partners work for the government or are well known often wish to conceal aspects of their own lifestyle and may feel more comfortable operating under a different name online. Survivors of domestic abuse who need not to be found by their abusers may wish to alter their name in whole or in part. And anyone with unpopular or dissenting political opinions may choose not to risk their livelihood by identifying with a pseudonym.
As Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens put forth in deciding McIntyre v. Ohio Elections Comm’n 514 U.S. 334, 357 (1995),
"Anonymity is a shield from the tyranny of the majority. It thus exemplifies the purpose behind the Bill of Rights, and of the First Amendment in particular: to protect unpopular individuals from retaliation—and their ideas from suppression—at the hand of an intolerant society. The right to remain anonymous may be abused when it shields fraudulent conduct. But political speech by its nature will sometimes have unpalatable consequences, and, in general, our society accords greater weight to the value of free speech than to the dangers of its misuse."
Just as using "real" names can have real consequences, mandating the use of "real" names can too, excluding from the conversation anyone who fears retribution for sharing their views. While one added value of requiring real names might be increased "civility" of the conversation, it is most certainly to the detriment of diversity.
The bloggers at Geek Feminism have compiled a wiki highlighting the people who are harmed by a real names policy, demonstrating the hundreds of potential reasons why an individual may use a name other than his or her own. Though many examples on the list demonstrate cases of at-risk individuals whose use of a pseudonym is for the purpose of safety, there are other important reasons that one may choose pseudonymity as well.
Take the example of Michael Anti, the Chinese journalist whose birth name is Jing Zhao. Anti was kicked off of Facebook in January of 2011, presumably after someone reported him for using a name other than the one with which he was born. Despite having used the pen name "Michael Anti" for almost a decade, in his writing for the New York Times and elsewhere, Facebook insisted on strict enforcement of its policy.
On Google+, similar examples have arisen, as have false positives, prompting Google+ to change some of its processes, including a shift from immediate account deactivation to offering users a warning and an opportunity to align their name with the policy.
Nevertheless, policies requiring "real" names are nearly impossible to enforce at scale, and as several examples have demonstrated, enforcement tends to be skewed against individuals who are well-known or have enemies, a result of community reporting mechanisms.
It is well within the rights of any company--Google, Facebook, or otherwise--to create policies as they see fit for their services. But it is shortsighted for these companies to suggest that "real name" policies create greater potential for civility, when they only do so at the expense of diversity and free expression. Indeed, a shift toward crafting policies requiring "real" names will have a chilling effect on online free expression.
Tech firm axed huge cache of News Int'l emails
http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2011/aug/01/news-international-ordered-email-mass-deletions
Newz from Limbo is a news site and, the hosting mechanism notwithstanding, should not be defined as a web log or as 'little more than a community forum'... Write News from Limbo at NewzfromLimbo=at=gmail=dot=com... The philosophical orientation of Newz from Limbo is best described as libertarian... For anti-censorship links: http://veilside78.blogspot.com/2010/12/anti-censorship-spectrum_23.html (If link fails, cut and paste it into the url bar)...
Sunday, July 31, 2011
Reports of cyber-hacking
add to Murdoch's worries
The Murdoch news empire faced new troubles as Scotland Yard began checking reports of computer hacking by operatives for the now-defunct News of the World, according to Larry McShane, writing in the New York News. The scandal went airborne when Murdoch operatives were accused of hacking the cell phones of a slain girl and of relatives of war dead and terror victims.
Meanwhile, on this side of the Atlantic, executives at the Murdoch-owned New York Post on Friday ordered all staffers to "preserve and maintain documents" involving phone hacking or bribery, the News said.
Police are "currently considering a number of allegations regarding breach of privacy ... including computer hacking," according to a police statement.
Murdoch's son James, who appeared alongside his father before Parliament, could be summoned for additional questioning after three ex-employees contradicted his testimony.
There was no mention of possible computer hacking at that parliamentary hearing, and the police declined to release any specifics in their statement, the News reported.
The phone-hacking allegations have already led to the arrests of 10 Murdoch employees, including former top executive Rebekah Brooks and former News of the World editor Andy Coulson.
Cyber-hacking charges have come up before, with Murdoch's News America paying a large sum to Floorgraphics over a cyber-hacking lawsuit after a whistleblower testified. (See http://conantcensorshipissue.
Sen. Frank R. Lautenberg, a New Jersey Democrat, has called on the FBI to take a serious look at that case.
War inquiry to blast Blair
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/
--
Newz from Limbo is a news site and, the hosting mechanism notwithstanding, should not be defined as a web log or as 'little more than a community forum'... Write News from Limbo at NewzfromLimbo=at=gmail=dot=
add to Murdoch's worries
The Murdoch news empire faced new troubles as Scotland Yard began checking reports of computer hacking by operatives for the now-defunct News of the World, according to Larry McShane, writing in the New York News. The scandal went airborne when Murdoch operatives were accused of hacking the cell phones of a slain girl and of relatives of war dead and terror victims.
Meanwhile, on this side of the Atlantic, executives at the Murdoch-owned New York Post on Friday ordered all staffers to "preserve and maintain documents" involving phone hacking or bribery, the News said.
Police are "currently considering a number of allegations regarding breach of privacy ... including computer hacking," according to a police statement.
Murdoch's son James, who appeared alongside his father before Parliament, could be summoned for additional questioning after three ex-employees contradicted his testimony.
There was no mention of possible computer hacking at that parliamentary hearing, and the police declined to release any specifics in their statement, the News reported.
The phone-hacking allegations have already led to the arrests of 10 Murdoch employees, including former top executive Rebekah Brooks and former News of the World editor Andy Coulson.
Cyber-hacking charges have come up before, with Murdoch's News America paying a large sum to Floorgraphics over a cyber-hacking lawsuit after a whistleblower testified. (See http://conantcensorshipissue.
Sen. Frank R. Lautenberg, a New Jersey Democrat, has called on the FBI to take a serious look at that case.
War inquiry to blast Blair
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/
--
Newz from Limbo is a news site and, the hosting mechanism notwithstanding, should not be defined as a web log or as 'little more than a community forum'... Write News from Limbo at NewzfromLimbo=at=gmail=dot=
Saturday, July 30, 2011
Birch Society gets thumbs down
as politicians pursue China ties
Birchers have been cast out of the Conservative Political Action Conference scheduled for next February, according to the Daily Caller.
This follows a decision by the National Governors Association to bar a John Birch Society journalist this month from a conference on China trade, which the society opposes on grounds of communism representing a threat to national security. Chinese journalists, most of whom may not be overly objective concerning communist matters, were welcomed.
According to the Birch Society, Krista Zaharias, a senior press officer with the governors group, informed the Birch Society's New American in a series of emails that the group was denying credentials for William F. Jasper, a New American writer, and his colleague, Sam Antonio, producer of Liberty News Network, because Zaharias did not consider the New American’s articles to be written “in an objective manner.”
According to official letters obtained by the Daily Caller, the gay conservative group GOProud and the anticommunist Birch Society won’t be co-sponsoring the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) in 2012.
The decision was reached by a full vote of the American Conservative Union’s board of directors. The ACU organizes and hosts CPAC each year.
Long targeted for its McCarthyist viewpoint, the John Birch Society’s campaign to thwart engagement with the communist Chinese regime is not welcomed by various powerful groups. The society stirred anger recently when it strongly opposed the appointment of Leon Panetta as defense secretary on grounds of a background of communist political networking and liberal positions it deemed as helpful to the communist causes.
Conservatives in the Senate joined in the unanimous vote to confirm Panetta's appointment.
The following information comes from Gary Benoit of the New American, a Birch publication:
On July 15 and 16, the National Governors Association Annual Meeting met in Salt Lake City and featured a first-ever U.S.-China Governors Forum that brought together provincial governors China with their American counterparts.
In addition to the many Chinese reporters based in the United States who covered the event, the Chinese governors brought along their own entourage of journalists, photographers, and videographers.
In January of this year, the international press freedom organization Reporters Without Borders reported that the Propaganda Department of the Communist Party of China had issued a series of directives ordering all Chinese journalists to undergo a six-month course aimed at training them, among other things, to “recognize and avoid politically sensitive topics.” The real purpose of the directives, says Reporters Without Borders is, “in short, to make journalists themselves actors in censorship.”
The governors group appeared to be "cooperating with China’s Propaganda Department in this new initiative, whether it realizes it or not," Benoit charged. "While dozens of Beijing’s trained propagandists posing as journalists were welcomed to the NGA summit, the New American’s senior editor, William F. Jasper, was singled out for exclusion."
Jasper and Antonio, however, managed to cover the event, Benoit wrote.
Salt Lake Tribune spotlights communist favoritism
http://www.ahorautah.com/sltrib/politics/52198373-90/credentials-governors-nga-jasper.html.csp
Newz from Limbo is a news site and, the hosting mechanism notwithstanding, should not be defined as a web log or as 'little more than a community forum'... Write News from Limbo at NewzfromLimbo=at=gmail=dot=com... The philosophical orientation of Newz from Limbo is best described as libertarian... For anti-censorship links: http://veilside78.blogspot.com/2010/12/anti-censorship-spectrum_23.html (If link fails, cut and paste it into the url bar)...
as politicians pursue China ties
Birchers have been cast out of the Conservative Political Action Conference scheduled for next February, according to the Daily Caller.
This follows a decision by the National Governors Association to bar a John Birch Society journalist this month from a conference on China trade, which the society opposes on grounds of communism representing a threat to national security. Chinese journalists, most of whom may not be overly objective concerning communist matters, were welcomed.
According to the Birch Society, Krista Zaharias, a senior press officer with the governors group, informed the Birch Society's New American in a series of emails that the group was denying credentials for William F. Jasper, a New American writer, and his colleague, Sam Antonio, producer of Liberty News Network, because Zaharias did not consider the New American’s articles to be written “in an objective manner.”
According to official letters obtained by the Daily Caller, the gay conservative group GOProud and the anticommunist Birch Society won’t be co-sponsoring the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) in 2012.
The decision was reached by a full vote of the American Conservative Union’s board of directors. The ACU organizes and hosts CPAC each year.
Long targeted for its McCarthyist viewpoint, the John Birch Society’s campaign to thwart engagement with the communist Chinese regime is not welcomed by various powerful groups. The society stirred anger recently when it strongly opposed the appointment of Leon Panetta as defense secretary on grounds of a background of communist political networking and liberal positions it deemed as helpful to the communist causes.
Conservatives in the Senate joined in the unanimous vote to confirm Panetta's appointment.
The following information comes from Gary Benoit of the New American, a Birch publication:
On July 15 and 16, the National Governors Association Annual Meeting met in Salt Lake City and featured a first-ever U.S.-China Governors Forum that brought together provincial governors China with their American counterparts.
In addition to the many Chinese reporters based in the United States who covered the event, the Chinese governors brought along their own entourage of journalists, photographers, and videographers.
In January of this year, the international press freedom organization Reporters Without Borders reported that the Propaganda Department of the Communist Party of China had issued a series of directives ordering all Chinese journalists to undergo a six-month course aimed at training them, among other things, to “recognize and avoid politically sensitive topics.” The real purpose of the directives, says Reporters Without Borders is, “in short, to make journalists themselves actors in censorship.”
The governors group appeared to be "cooperating with China’s Propaganda Department in this new initiative, whether it realizes it or not," Benoit charged. "While dozens of Beijing’s trained propagandists posing as journalists were welcomed to the NGA summit, the New American’s senior editor, William F. Jasper, was singled out for exclusion."
Jasper and Antonio, however, managed to cover the event, Benoit wrote.
Salt Lake Tribune spotlights communist favoritism
http://www.ahorautah.com/sltrib/politics/52198373-90/credentials-governors-nga-jasper.html.csp
Newz from Limbo is a news site and, the hosting mechanism notwithstanding, should not be defined as a web log or as 'little more than a community forum'... Write News from Limbo at NewzfromLimbo=at=gmail=dot=com... The philosophical orientation of Newz from Limbo is best described as libertarian... For anti-censorship links: http://veilside78.blogspot.com/2010/12/anti-censorship-spectrum_23.html (If link fails, cut and paste it into the url bar)...
Friday, July 29, 2011
Report is critical of president
on autocratic secrecy powers
The American Civil Liberties Union is chastising the Obama administration's record on transparency versus excessive secrecy.
www.aclu.org/files/assets/secrecyreport_20110727.pdf
In the report, "Drastic Measures Required: Congress Needs to Overhaul Secrecy Laws and Increase Oversight of the Secret Security Establishment," the rights lobby chides President Obama for his "mixed record" on secrecy issues and accuses him of authoritarian, anti-democratic behavior on a number of points.
Charging that "reality has not always lived up" to Obama's past rhetoric, the group complained that the Obama administration:
• Embraced the Bush administration’s tactic of using overly broad “state secrets” claims to block lawsuits focused on government misconduct.
• Fought a court order to release photos depicting the abuse of detainees held in U.S. custody and supported legislation to exempt these photos from the Freedom of Information Act retroactively. The legislation gave the secretary of defense sweeping authority to withhold any visual images depicting the government’s “treatment of individuals engaged, captured, or detained” by U.S. forces, no matter how egregious the conduct depicted or how compelling the public’s interest in disclosure.
• Threatened to veto legislation designed to reform congressional notification procedures for covert actions.
• Aggressively pursued whistleblowers who reported waste, fraud and abuse in national security programs with criminal prosecutions to a greater degree than any previous presidential administration.
• Refused to declassify information about how the government uses its authority under section 215 of the Patriot Act to collect information about Americans not relevant to terrorism or espionage investigations.
"Moreover, when opportunities for taking bold measures to attack unnecessary secrecy arose, the administration failed to act or chose timid and incremental steps instead," according to the report, written by Mike German and Jay Stanley.
German, a former FBI agent, is the ACLU's policy counsel on national security. Stanley is an ACLU policy analyst on speech, privacy and technology.
Newz from Limbo is a news site and, the hosting mechanism notwithstanding, should not be defined as a web log or as 'little more than a community forum'... Write News from Limbo at NewzfromLimbo=at=gmail=dot=com... The philosophical orientation of Newz from Limbo is best described as libertarian... For anti-censorship links: http://veilside78.blogspot.com/2010/12/anti-censorship-spectrum_23.html (If link fails, cut and paste it into the url bar)...
on autocratic secrecy powers
The American Civil Liberties Union is chastising the Obama administration's record on transparency versus excessive secrecy.
www.aclu.org/files/assets/secrecyreport_20110727.pdf
In the report, "Drastic Measures Required: Congress Needs to Overhaul Secrecy Laws and Increase Oversight of the Secret Security Establishment," the rights lobby chides President Obama for his "mixed record" on secrecy issues and accuses him of authoritarian, anti-democratic behavior on a number of points.
Charging that "reality has not always lived up" to Obama's past rhetoric, the group complained that the Obama administration:
• Embraced the Bush administration’s tactic of using overly broad “state secrets” claims to block lawsuits focused on government misconduct.
• Fought a court order to release photos depicting the abuse of detainees held in U.S. custody and supported legislation to exempt these photos from the Freedom of Information Act retroactively. The legislation gave the secretary of defense sweeping authority to withhold any visual images depicting the government’s “treatment of individuals engaged, captured, or detained” by U.S. forces, no matter how egregious the conduct depicted or how compelling the public’s interest in disclosure.
• Threatened to veto legislation designed to reform congressional notification procedures for covert actions.
• Aggressively pursued whistleblowers who reported waste, fraud and abuse in national security programs with criminal prosecutions to a greater degree than any previous presidential administration.
• Refused to declassify information about how the government uses its authority under section 215 of the Patriot Act to collect information about Americans not relevant to terrorism or espionage investigations.
"Moreover, when opportunities for taking bold measures to attack unnecessary secrecy arose, the administration failed to act or chose timid and incremental steps instead," according to the report, written by Mike German and Jay Stanley.
German, a former FBI agent, is the ACLU's policy counsel on national security. Stanley is an ACLU policy analyst on speech, privacy and technology.
Newz from Limbo is a news site and, the hosting mechanism notwithstanding, should not be defined as a web log or as 'little more than a community forum'... Write News from Limbo at NewzfromLimbo=at=gmail=dot=com... The philosophical orientation of Newz from Limbo is best described as libertarian... For anti-censorship links: http://veilside78.blogspot.com/2010/12/anti-censorship-spectrum_23.html (If link fails, cut and paste it into the url bar)...
No comments:
Post a Comment